Operation Spanner -Michael Hames Dirty Squad

According to Michael Hames book Dirty Squad, Operation Spanner was mainly to do with consensual but extremely violent sado masochism. One such act was slicing the penis of another with a scalpel.

Some of those arrested in Operation Spanner had links and were charged with offences related to child sexual abuse.

Ian Donaldson appears to have been in charge of Operation Spanner, although it seems DPP coordinated the Inquiry.

82 potential defendants were interviewed and more contacts could have been followed up.

16 were charged

The average age was 50 and jobs varied from missile designer, lawyer, civil servant, forester, care assistant for mentally disabled, 2 restauranteurs, lay preacher, former fire officer, computer operator, retired finance officer, antiques restorer, tattooist, porter, and former pig breeder.

Acts of sadomasochism occurred in Whitchurch, Pontypridd,  Birmingham, Bolton, Evesham, Cambridge, London.

Men involved

  • Lucas
  • Johnny Atkinson had been violently raped at a childrens home as a boy
  • Colin Lasky previous conviction for buggery on a boy, 5 years sentence charged with indecent photographs of a child
  • Cadman – ice cream vendor access to boys aged 11/12 was his preference
  • Kelly
  • Wilkinson
  • Grindley
  • Lofthouse – Norfolk
  • Christopher Zimmerli – Hampstead, Lawyer for international company
  • Roland Jaggard – missile designer British Aerospace, sadist with blood interest, liked penile mutilations
  • James Phippen
  • Donald Anderson – charged with bestiality

Bulk of charges related to assault or bodily harm.

  • Colin Lasky 5 years
  • Forester and care worker 3 and half years
  • computer operator and ice cream vendor involved with children, 4 and half years
  • missile engineer and lay preacher 3 years
  • finance officer 33 months
  • pig breeder a year
  • 4 suspended sentences
  • one fine
  • one probation
  • one conditional discharge

See also Times Law Report on European Court of Human Rights Appeal Laskey, Jaggard and Brown v UK ECHR Times Law Report (Operation Spanner) [3]

See also Operation Greenlight Operation Spanner [4] Cadman, Lofthouse, Zimmerli and Lasky

Here is the Mike Hames Chapter on Operation Spanner  The Dirty Squad [1]

Index of Newspaper and Journal articles on this blog [1]

Index of Court Appeals on this blog [2]

1989 Oct 10 Glasgow Herald Fifteen charged after Operation Spanner [3]

1992 Feb 21 Times Law Reports  Brown, Laskey, Jaggard, Lucas, Carter, Cadman – Court of Appeal (Spanner) [6]

1993 Mar 12 Times Law Reports Brown, Lucas, Jaggard, Laskey, Carter – House of Lords (Spanner) [7]

1997 Feb 20 Times Law Report Laskey, Jaggard and Brown v UK ECHR (Operation Spanner) [4]

1997 Times Law Report Laskey, Jaggard and Brown v UK – EHCR (Spanner) [5]

all related to this post  2017 Mar 24 Cathy Fox Blog 2000 Apr 6  Michael Hames The Dirty Squad   [8]

Please note that victims of abuse may be triggered by reading this information. These links are generally UK based.

  • The Sanctuary for the Abused [A] has advice on how to prevent triggers.
  • National Association for People Abused in Childhood [B] has a freephone helpline and has links to local support groups.
  • One in Four [C]
  • Havoca [D].
  • Useful post on Triggers [E]  from SurvivorsJustice [F] blog.
  • Jim Hoppers pages on Mindfulness [G]  and Meditation [H] may be useful.
  • Hwaairfan blog An Indigenous Australian Approach to Healing Trauma  [J]
  • Survivors UK for victims and survivors of male rape or the sexual abuse of men [K]
  • Voicing CSA group [L] helps arrange survivors meetings in your area
  • A Prescription for me blog Various emotional support links [M]
  • ShatterBoys -“Male Survivors Of Childhood Sexual Abuse Inspiring change, Through Shared Experience Whilst Building Connections…Together We Can Heal” [N]

 

Links

[1] 2000 Apr 6  Michael Hames The Dirty Squad   https://www.amazon.co.uk/d/cka/Dirty-Squad-Michael-Hames/0316853216/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1490120494&sr=8-3&keywords=Michael+hames

[2] 2017 Mar 8 Cathy Fox Blog Heroes for Exposing Child Sexual Abuse – Part 1 – Peter McKelvie https://cathyfox.wordpress.com/2017/03/08/heroes-for-exposing-child-sexual-abuse-part-1-peter-mckelvie/

[3] 2017 Mar 24 Cathy fox Blog Laskey, Jaggard and Brown v UK ECHR Times Law Report (Operation Spanner) https://cathyfox.wordpress.com/2017/03/24/laskey-jaggard-and-brown-v-uk-echr-times-law-report-operation-spanner/

[4] Operation Greenlight Operation Spanner https://webbrain.com/brainpage/brain/0FE31538-2121-8495-33A5-86073BE95DE1/thought/918#-10156

[3]  2017 Mar 25 Cathy Fox Blog 1989 Oct 10 Glasgow Herald Fifteen charged after Operation Spanner https://cathyfox.wordpress.com/2017/03/25/glasgow-herald-10-oct-1989-fifteen-charged-after-operation-spanner/

[4] 2017 Mar 24 Cathy Fox Blog Laskey, Jaggard and Brown v UK ECHR Times Law Report 1997 Feb 20 (Operation Spanner) https://cathyfox.wordpress.com/2017/03/24/laskey-jaggard-and-brown-v-uk-echr-times-law-report-operation-spanner/

[5] 2017 Mar 24 Cathy Fox Blog Laskey, Jaggard and Brown v UK – Times Law Report 1997 EHCR (Spanner) https://cathyfox.wordpress.com/2017/03/25/laskey-jaggard-and-brown-v-uk-times-law-report-1997-ehcr-spanner/

[6] 2017 Mar 24 Cathy Fox Blog Brown, Laskey, Jaggard, Lucas, Carter, Cadman 21 February 1992 Times Law Reports Court of Appeal (Spanner) https://cathyfox.wordpress.com/2017/03/25/brown-laskey-jaggard-lucas-carter-cadman-21-february-1992-times-law-reports-court-of-appeal-spanner/

[7] 2017 Mar 24 Cathy Fox Blog Brown, Lucas, Jaggard, Laskey, Carter 12 March 1993 Times Law Reports House of Lords (Spanner) https://cathyfox.wordpress.com/2017/03/25/brown-lucas-jaggard-laskey-carter-12-march-1993-times-law-reports-house-of-lords/

[8] 2017 Mar 24 Cathy Fox Blog 2000 Apr 6  Michael Hames The Dirty Squad   https://www.amazon.co.uk/d/cka/Dirty-Squad-Michael-Hames/0316853216/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1490120494&sr=8-3&keywords=Michael+hames

Many spiders when they unite can tie down a lion – Ethiopean Proverb

Advertisements

About cathy fox blog on Child Abuse

the truth will out, the truth will shout, the truth will set us free...
This entry was posted in cathy fox blog, Hackney, Herefordshire and Worcestershire and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

68 Responses to Operation Spanner -Michael Hames Dirty Squad

  1. grimstock says:

    A marvellous work of part fiction. More lies and fabrications in order to justify the actions taken.
    There were no children involved or “possibly enticed”. Much of what is written is pure fabrication, on top of which none of the men involved knew more than six or seven others. What had commenced as a targeting of visitors to a Bryn Alyn whistleblower’s residence ( following a dire threat from a senior officer of Manchester Children’s Services (one of John Allen’s pimps) in November 1983), together with trespassing by John Allen security (it was a very isolated house) and co-ordinated raids by Manchester police culminated 4 years later with charges being brought in 1987. It had been a fishing expedition right from the start, and targeted contacts of visitors, their contacts of contacts, etc. A leading QC on the case informed me that over 6.5 million pounds had been spent on the investigation, with over 640 raids with warrants/ over 100 early deaths including over 60 suicides. There had been one of the group who was underage several years earlier, and that fact was played upon. I do not agree or attempt to justify what any of the men may or may not have engaged in, but I do not believe the state was right to intervene
    because something bad “might have happened”.
    Hames was, after all Margaret Thatcher’s proposed candidate for the role of head of OPB from the General Synod members who were considered. Thus he was appointed at Thatcher’s request from the Church of England General Synod and tasked with enforcing “Christian family values” upon the nation. This was at the very start of Thatcher’s premiership.
    He was therefore head of OPB at the Met from that date and well before Spanner started in 1983 (it was not classed as Spanner until the charges in 1987). It is entirely possible that he did not undertake all 640 raids, but he was in charge.
    Without naming names, I can also say for certainty that one of the men became the leading expert on body modifications in the UK, and the ice-cream vendor involved was a Mister Softie, and not a Mister Whippy!
    At the end of the day. there was no justification for the jailings as none of the men were a danger, and there was certainly no justification for 6.5 million of public funds being splashed out in such a manner. The corruption at Bryn Alyn and Manchester had been brought to the notice of the House of Commons in 1985. The first suicides from raids by Hames’s squad were around
    Christmas 1983.

    • grimstock says:

      The date Hames took over the reins of the OPB above is most possibly incorrect. I do apologise, and shall correct this in a later comment when I have more details.

    • grimstock says:

      The DPP would certainly have been involved following the spannermen raids as Hames could not see how to stitch the men up on assault charges, but claimed it to be unlawful – however it was only around two years later when the charges were fully drawn up.
      Self harm without injury had never been criminalised before Spanner.

    • grimstock says:

      Michael Hames was Margaret Thatcher’s choice for the position historically known as the Witchfinder General
      A unique and historical appointment where a member of the Church of England General Synod is appointed to a senior position within the Met. with his own squad of officers to undertake work on behalf of the Church, and is the only appointment the Church is allowed to make to the Met.
      In Hames’s case, he was already a serving policeman when appointed, so the appointment would have appeared as a promotion within the Met. at the time.

  2. Ummmm ,Well i say this , no smoke without fire.

    • grimstock says:

      Ambulances do not cause road accidents – but they may if they intercept all oncoming traffic for four years.

  3. grimstock says:

    Many lies and smears were circulated (including links to child abuse) by the OPB and the media, resulting in the men, particularly during the trial, being beaten, kicked, shoved to the ground, and as I recall, one broken arm and a broken nose from having to walk a daily gauntlet surrounded by hostile crowds, whilst the police encouraged such behaviour by looking the other way. There was one link to an underage photo which was charged against many of the men for having a copy, and related to a photo of one of the group 5 years earlier, when he was 17 and before the raids started. He was, however, old enough at the time to engage in war for the government. I shall detail some of the lies another time, but most of them are claimed to be related to child abuse in order to smear the defendants. There were no such charges or witnesses related to those smears, and to the best of my knowledge the claim of previous conviction against Colin Laskey does not stand up. I do not believe either the claim that he was an ex-teacher; although he was a talented and much respected rugby referee, and had always lived in a small community. There was no mention of such matters amongst the valleys community where he lived:
    http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/a-welshmans-ruling-passion-1612268.html
    It is also interesting that the following behaviour and public display (albeit not so severe as some photos depict ) is NOT against the law in England providing the participants are 16 years of age:
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3287819/Spilling-blood-religion-Tiny-Shi-ite-Muslim-boys-whip-sharp-blades-mourn-death-Prophet-Muhammad-s-grandson.html
    I personally feel; particularly considering the above discrepancies in the case; that the first four years of raids (1983-87) were simply a fishing expedition, and that the second operation (Spanner 1987-90) was,
    (1) a direct retaliation for exposing Thatcher’s paedophile control system throughout the Commons for all to see in 1985, relating to a Bryn Alyn corruption investigation by the Home Office, and so can be traced directly to 10 Downing Street and June 1985, when the matter was dealt with/assigned.
    (2) a trumped-up case intended to justify the squandering by Margaret Thatcher of £6.5 million
    of public funds on her very special “hit” unit enforcing archaic common law on behalf of the Church of England. Let me see now, what was that called? It’s on the tip of my tongue.,,,,,,

    • Are you saying that the child abuse referred to was all from one photo, and that would not be classed as child abuse today as the law has changed?

      • grimstock says:

        To the best of my knowledge, Yes. it concerned one photograph, and by today’s standard would not have been unlawful, and related to a photo taken in 1982/83 five years before seizure. It would also have been lawful at the time, had it been a photo of a female or of a heterosexual male. There would also have been at least one video taken at a later date.
        It was the one thing that the men involved accepted as being unlawful at the time.
        None of the other charges were considered to be unlawful prior to the Spanner case re-interpretation of the law.

    • grimstock says:

      I believe Colin Lasky did have a previous conviction, but he certainly was not into young boys, that I know.
      The charge of Buggery although once a common term, still stands for certain cases, but the term Boy would relate to when the age of consent for gay sex was 21 whilst for straight sex 16, otherwise the term would normally be “boy under –“.
      However I would not give much weight to anything coming from Hames, particularly discussing someone who passed away many years ago, as a lot of his information is simply incorrect. If it were true, It could have applied when both men were 20 (1963 for Colin), and in addition has no bearing whatsoever on the matters dealt with at trial and is only relevant for sentencing purposes.

  4. grimstock says:

    OR, was the convergence of time and place between police and the John Allen network merely a coincidence, and the real reason for the 640 raids was recovery of a missing snuff movie before it fell into the wrong hands? (or was this the LINK to Bryn Alyn/John Allen/) Perhaps we may never know..
    And where does “Gay Galaxy” come into all this, and the adverts that had been placed in that magazine? Was the magazine genuine, or simply a Manchester Police honeytrap? If the latter were the case, then it would suggest someone has lost their snuff movie.

  5. grimstock says:

    The whole operation had neither been originally focussed on the men charged,nor had there been any links to child abuse (save for an old photo of one of the men charged)
    The linking of false claims, smears and accusations of child abuse
    also served a two-fold purpose;
    A) To ensure bias against the men both before and during the trial. (There had actually been a successful smearing against the men prior to the trial involving most national newspapers printing false information that had been released to them by Hames).
    B) To ensure that the real reason for the operation from 1983 until 1987,(when the 16 men were raided and charged) was well camouflaged from exposure as linked to 1983 and Bryn Alyn by the umbrella of “child protection”, and the “Spanner” tag being used from 1987 onwards.
    All this is well evidenced by the following undeniable facts:
    1) There had been over 640 raids carried out (by 1987),the majority of which had no connections whatsoever to these men; and,
    2) The bulk of charges related to “Conspiring to cause actual bodily harm upon themselves” related to the individuals concerned, and not their interactions with others.

  6. grimstock says:

    It had been a four tear long operation 1983 to 1987 ending in epic failure, which grasped at straws and the spannermen both in desperation and to some degree retaliation in order to try and justify both it’s existence and massive expenditure which finally ended in December 1990 with the incarcerations of the men.

  7. grimstock says:

    Naturally the final charges and sentences brought would Have appeased his masters-the Church of England General Synod-whom had always sought to make examples of sex both outside marriage and in a gay context. (see: 1987 General Synod Higton motion), and also for Margaret Thatcher’s “Christian Family Values” campaign; his homophobic and Christian extremist nature stood him in good stead, and also perhaps had a large part to play in the reported suicides from his Spanner raids (claimed by a leading QC to be in excess of 60).

  8. grimstock says:

    The original Reverend Higton 1987 General Synod Motion does not seem to be available anywhere, so it must have been quite extreme, as what was passed in place was a “watered-down” version, (above) that was passed almost unanimously, save for 8 members.
    Without seeing a copy, it is unclear if extreme measures such as genital mutilation was or was not mentioned.

  9. Thats all interesting, do you know any good links on how the different bodies/committees in the church run it?

  10. grimstock says:

    Everything available to the public should be found here, via the menu on the left:
    https://www.churchofengland.org/about-us/structure/general-synod/about-general-synod.aspx
    However, this is just the official info. It would really require insider knowledge to make any sense.
    There may be blogs around, such as this, that would offer more insight:
    https://bathwellschap.wordpress.com/
    It is also interesting to note that the “Higton” motion from 1987 as it stands is still applicable to this day.
    Convocations history:
    https://www.churchofengland.org/about-us/structure/general-synod/about-general-synod/convocations.aspx
    C of E appointments:
    https://www.churchofengland.org/media/1213097/gs%20misc%20963.pdf
    If I find anything good, I shall post it here.

  11. grimstock says:

    This is a little more concise:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/christianity/cofe/cofe_1.shtml
    “(The General Synod) is the only body with powers delegated from parliament to pass so-called “measures” which are incorporated into English law. They have the full force and effect of an act of parliament and can apply to any Church-related matter.”
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7238456.stm
    Common Law:
    (Common law is the body of law developed from the thirteenth century to the present day, as case law or precedent, by judges, courts, and tribunals. … In cases where the parties disagree on what the law is, a common law court looks to past precedential decisions of relevant courts.)
    ” law contributed significantly in the development of the English mediaeval realm towards what may be called a ‘state’. Firstly, political thinking was greatly stimulated by clashes between kings and Church over their relative authority. These frequently were conducted through polemic resting heavily upon law and legal argument, and were a vital stimulus to the ideological thinking which underlay the development of abstract notions of the state.”
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/middle_ages/henryii_law_01.shtml
    (I shall keep digging, but may only dig what is in the public domain).

  12. grimstock says:

    One question that has never been asked to my knowledge (perhaps due to the cover-up of the real statistics involved) was the question about all the suicides.
    My statistics of the case do come from a reliable source
    Over 60 seems to be a very high amount, although in context with 640+ raids levels out at 1 in 10.
    I would like to know, as would perhaps many others, as to how many of the 60+ suicides occurred
    on the day of the raid in question?
    I am surprised that nobody has yet followed this up.
    Even 1 in 10 seems rather high for the time.

    • I am interested in the suicides. Have you any evidence for these, or anything that can be followed up on?

      • grimstock says:

        The evidence I do personally have is already noted, but further information I can release to a court should the need arise. All suicides had taken place by 1986 (before the spannermen raids). The actual number comes from a leading barrister, whom I do not yet wish to name, but I have no reason to doubt his information as it also corresponds with information passed to me by one of the 16 defendants. I would suggest if anyone has an old copy of “Gay Galaxy” or very early reports (1987 at latest) of the Spanner case, further info might be found there.
        Like the total cost, the statistics in the case seem to get smaller every year. I wonder why? The suicides appear to gave been “hushed-up” from the start,
        (Evidence may also be found in the “potential defendants” statistics in your post, since it tallies with my figures). I do not believe the suicides were doubted at the time, but it seems very strange- particularly with what we now know. I shall comment on these anomalies later this week (moderation permitted, naturally). Many thanks for your interest!

        • grimstock says:

          The vast majority of those raided would have been single gay men, so the fact that they had been raided would not have been so much of a problem. However, many would have been successful businessmen, and some very well known within their communities, and the threat of charges being brought, and all their sexual perversions exposed in the local press may well have been too much to contemplate. So it stands to reason that they would have been either arrested or threatened with charges. Since they had not been yet charged (i.e: their name had not been released) they would have been potential defendants. However, if the figure 0f 82 potential defendants is correct, then that means that virtually 100% of all those threatened with charges by 1986 had committed suicide.
          Now that is strange! However, I do know that a lot, perhaps most, would have been at one time masons, and some may certainly have been very skilled in many occult arts including divination ( a matter which may be of very significant relevance, and which I shall cover in another comment). Wizardry had always been intensely feared by puritans.

        • grimstock says:

          Also, the police would not have been able to produce the figures in court had the suicides not been potential defendants, as they would not have been informed of such.

        • grimstock says:

          I am not for one minute entertaining any notion that the suicides involved were not so, nor indeed am I implying that they might be related to the occult, though if the numbers are correct, then the statistics have an eerie resemblance to the above reference to the puritan witch hunts insofar as “the punishment (often with death, sometimes with incarceration) of individuals” does however fit the bill, whether intended or not.
          Of course, the Church and clergy in general do often clash over the direction or course of action, and Thatcher was no exception, as the House of Laity (lay members/not clergy) has often been filled with extreme viewpoints:
          https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/nov/21/church-house-laity-special-interest
          Nevertheless, if the problem was witchcraft/occult/wizardry, then under common law, only the Archbishop as Ordinary by convocation may decide punishment, or if by other ordinary in three months after arrest:
          https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=xJIDAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA446&lpg=PA446&dq=england+general+synod+and+heresies&source=bl&ots=VKnm16c-8a&sig=LBvA5-jby8jmoANnOh68azZXNwg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj7vP2005DTAhXCFsAKHXXaAf8Q6AEIVzAJ#v=onepage&q=england%20general%20synod%20and%20heresies&f=false
          (scroll down)
          Although it does seem perfectly acceptable to those who see only the work of the devil, to engage him for their own purpose – (a prime example being Margaret Thatcher and Jimmy Savile); and therefore if employed in the work of God, then presumably all is well (and obviously this would seem to apply where freemasonry is concerned). However, wizardry has always been much feared as the devil’s work, especially divination, as when the future is revealed, then God cannot exist as creation itself is proven to be untrue. Only evolution, not creation may explain such an occurrence, and therefore to a Puritan mind, only the Devil would wish to disprove God’s existence:
          https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=ah-iE6o3SmwC&pg=PA141&lpg=PA141&dq=wizard+of+the+general+synod&source=bl&ots=HX_vn93gZZ&sig=WADzVJJ68h6FIqKVFEQK7800EeQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj1mNnu-ZbTAhXHIMAKHaAZCig4ChDoAQgvMAQ#v=onepage&q=wizard%20of%20the%20general%20synod&f=false
          It does seem to me that more information is certainly required, even if just to put minds at rest after all these years.

        • grimstock says:

          Correction: the newspaper reports were only released with the charges being brought on the 16 defendants, and some give the real statistics of the case to that date (excepting mention of suicides). The charges were only brought around 1989, or perhaps late 1988,
          and only mention 16 defendants. Some reports were just a sentence tucked away and were not usually on front page, unlike the trial reports. There followed several pre-trial hearings for 18 to 24 months approximately at 6 month intervals, prior to the trial, all held in London courts. Gay Galaxy only ran throughout 1983, and I believe folded around 1984. Gay Galaxy was just a cheap typeset A5 size booklet with blue card cover front and back and carried no photos or images, only adverts, (printed in Manchester area).

  13. grimstock says:

    Considering the connections with Bryn Alyn/ snuff films/ the occult/ Church of England Synod/ “Christian family values”/ 60+ dead potential defendants/ a four-year long intelligence gathering exercise/ disguised as child protection/- is this case possibly much more sinister than people may have realised?

    • grimstock says:

      Could it possibly be that the backlash, outrage and public furore over such an obvious affront to S/M gays in this operation may also have served a very important purpose in the successful camouflage of the possibly intended underlying nature of the operation – one which momentarily signified a return to traditional Christian fundamentalist values; and one believing that those who should have been outcast (by the Church) and yet were versed in witchcraft, may pose a formidable threat: – supported in part by an unopposed Church, and assisted by a willing establishment keen to revalidate their supreme power?

  14. grimstock says:

    Mrs. Thatcher’s Return to Victorian Values (by Raphael Samuel, University of Oxford, 1990)
    http://www.britac.ac.uk/pubs/proc/files/78p009.pdf
    (includes on page 19):
    “Mrs. Thatcher’s values, as many commentators have pointed out, were Puritan values. A literal
    belief in the devil may help to account for her readiness to discover ‘enemies within’,”

  15. grimstock says:

    Questions raised over Ian Donaldson (one time Head of OPB):
    http://timtate.co.uk/blog/of-generals-and-child-abuse/
    The Obscene Publications Squad wished to be pro-active with paedophiles, but their requests were rejected:
    “Three years later, Iain Donaldson, who ran the Obscene Publications Squad from 1985 to 1989, mounted exactly the same argument in a formal proposal, entitled “The Investigation of Multiple Offences of Child Exploitation Outside the Family”. That report, too, was rejected.
    In 1994, Michael Hames, who took over the Obscene Publications Squad, submitted a confidential report to the Commissioner arguing the same line. “We need a pro-active national squad to go out and gather information and to target these people – like they do for burglars and robbers,” he told me then. However, his report was rejected.”
    http://www.nickdavies.net/1996/08/01/losing-the-battle-against-child-abuse/
    However, not only does there seem to be discrepancies with the dates of Hames’s reign as Head of OPB in this report, but he had actually used such a system with Operation Spanner in the four-year run up to the arrests and charges being brought in 1987 (although it may have been running prior to 1983; that is not known). It seems, however,that he did gain promotion in 1990 to Det.Chief Supt. of the Met. in that year.
    The Spanner Case background:
    In 1983/84 the Obscene Publications Squad with the assistance of Manchester Police were believed to have either ran/monitored (or both) a gay contact magazine, “Gay Galaxy”as a dragnet sting operation. This operation name is not known, but was the preliminary intelligence-gathering ground for the Spanner Operation.
    The magazine carried adverts that were not of the mild nature of other gay magazines. These were adverts from those who were into or seeking witchcraft/extreme/S/M/slavery/incontinence/scat/body modifications,etc.,and all such adverts that would normally be refused by the “straight” best-selling gay contact magazines. Obviously a lot of adverts were either unlawful or requesting unlawful acts.
    Two adverts that regularly appeared in each addition were similar to:
    1) “Snuff movies wanted. Unlimited top cash price paid for extreme and underage movies”
    2) “Extreme and bondage SM movies wanted – top cash prices paid for movies showing bizarre or underage extreme acts”
    (or words to that effect)
    That the magazine was operated or monitored by the police is evidenced by the fact that the magazine was not only allowed to operate for two years(although it was claimed they were raided by the police on at least two occasions – ending around 1984 when the magazine folded as “police had taken everything including all advertisers details”) However, neither did any known prosecutions follow related to this alleged seizure.
    Considering the switch of resources related to a matter involving the Bryn Alyn network, could it possibly be that the movies being sought had originated from Bryn Alyn, and had perhaps been stolen some time before, and depicted recognisable VIP’s?
    What followed next is well reported on the internet and above.
    Obviously what the police did already have from Gay Galaxy was a very full list of advertisers and their responders names,addresses,innermost sexual deviances and preferences which alone would have been in the hundreds.

    • Any evidence of the 1983-7 police investigation or leads to go on would be useful

      • grimstock says:

        Gay Galaxy would be a good start. The raids by Manchester Police on the magazine were mentioned in the magazine, but not in the media. Over 624+ raids were carried out by 1986 prior to the “reported Spanner”, They were not reported in the media, – but they will be in early records of the case since they were reported for the trial- as were the suicides, that is where the statistics were realised. It was mostly covered up for obvious reasons. The costs were astronomic for the time. Failure of the case, or publication of the real statistics would not have been an option due to the scale of failure to justify such figures. The spannermen were kept in the dark about the operation until raided in 1987.
        The figure of 640+ would be possibly about right also for advertisers+responders+spannermen+friends, etc at a very rough guess.
        I do not know who was in charge for this episode, but Hames personally carried out the 1987 raids.

      • grimstock says:

        I would suggest that is where 624 raids and suicides are to be found, along with the missing “potential defendants”. Now it would be interesting to know what the 66 missing poyrntial defendants had been raided for/the date of the raid/the reason for no charges being brought- and the date of death and the cause.

    • grimstock says:

      Penultimate paragraph above should end with “VIPs or children”.

    • grimstock says:

      It is also quite ironic that what had, in previous decades, been a Pornography Unit of the Met. should then turn to an Obscenities Unit using exactly such a booklet as they would have previously been seizing as unlawful in past decades. Though it did not signify a change of heart, but rather a change of tactics – and a change of target.

  16. grimstock says:

    82 potential defendants minus 16 charged equals 66 possibly alleged potential defendants committed suicide.
    That tallies with my figures.
    All of these suicides had occurred prior to the raids on the 16 defendants charged in 1987. The first known to me as occurring around Christmas 1983, although there may have been earlier cases. By the charges being brought in 1987, all raids were completed, with a bill in excess of £4.5millions and rising.

  17. grimstock says:

    That the scope and purpose of the whole exercise was to deliberately target gay people and their perceived (by Church of England) “abhorrent” practices as a primary deciding factor in the operations(s) is firmly proven through the use of a gay contact magazine “honeytrap” through which they (raided persons) were all unfairly ensnared, and the Church of England police unit involvement, (restricted to the use of Common Law)
    As secondary deciding factor, (perceived extreme practices), the first and foremost (gay) had to be first proven. So the exercise was a muscle-flexing of the Church of England powers, to which the state were required to acquiesce to, as a direct attack on gay people primarily, and covertly on gay people with extreme practices, disguised as a matter of morality. This is undeniable.

    • grimstock says:

      Although at all times, the target group were considered to be the possible recipients of missing or stolen snuff and underage extreme videos – nevertheless this assumption was proven to be completely wrong, and no such evidence had been found to my knowledge, or charges would certainly have followed and would have been heralded in the media, as were the fake news stories about the spannermen. This part of the operation therefore failed.

    • grimstock says:

      The questions must also be asked:
      1) If this operation was a gay with hunt? – (Yes- most certainly)
      2) If this operation was coupled with a gay masonic or gay paedophile witch hunt? – (Not known)
      3) Would this fact be used as a tool ( a SPANNER, as it were) against her own Cabinet Minister as a threat, (lest they meet the same fate) should they not acquiesce to her wishes? – (Yes – most certainly)

      • grimstock says:

        Was this operation called Spanner because it tightened Margaret Thatcher’s grip on her subordinates?

        • grimstock says:

          Was the ease with which the police obtained search warrants for snuff or underage movies against innocent people part of the threat of dire consequence against Thatcher’s own ministers?

        • grimstock says:

          Was the fact that there were 650 members of the House of Commons related to the (over) 640 raids insofar as implying that Thatcher could raid the whole lot if she so wished, and no party or member of the Commons should consider themselves immune from the threat?

        • grimstock says:

          Was it called spanner because she had her ministers by the nuts?

      • grimstock says:

        Is that really all this case was about?
        7 Years of intense police work
        Over 60 good men lost/took their lives
        Many of the most decent men you would ever find had to sit incarcerated for no good reason in the filthy slum of Wandsworth Prison
        A never-ending legal battle still being fought to date
        £6,500,000 of public funds squandered
        Over 640 lives ruined
        and much much more
        Simply to exert pressure on Margaret Thatcher’s wayward gay cabinet ministers in order to keep them in line and afraid of falling foul of her wishes?
        Oh my! surely not?

      • grimstock says:

        Had the Church of England allowed their own Met. police unit to target 640 gay men, not only to punish sex amongst gay men, but also to firmly cement Margaret Thatcher’s power into place; (by instilling fear of possible dire consequences amongst her ministers) because she was a fundamentalist supporter and champion of the Church?

        • grimstock says:

          Is this why the police were targeting practices considered to be extreme – because for the (87-90) part of the operation, incarceration was required, (as opposed to the purpose of the first (83-86) part); and “normal” gay sex would not be punishable?

      • grimstock says:

        – Or was the operation named Spanner because it spanned so many of both Thatcher’s and the General Synod’s problems, through;
        A direct attack on gay s/m sex, on behalf of the Synod,
        Her ability to issue unconnected search warrants,
        Her abilities to have Common Law re-interpreted through the Church of England powers,
        A threat against all the members of the House, and especially her own ministers
        should they not comply with her wishes,
        An extensive search for missing or stolen snuff or underage videos or movies,
        Her abilities to possibly choose the end fortune of those targeted,
        The introduction of a precedent in Common Law that shows that your body belongs to
        the state and not the individual, (ready for agenda 21 and compulsory vaccinations),
        Incarcerations linked to an address that was involved in exposing corruption between
        Bryn Alyn Children’s Home and Manchester Children’s Services,
        The ability to instigate a massive witch-hunt if needed should opposition be forthcoming
        from a group,
        Who could deny to be in awe of her powers?

  18. grimstock says:

    So if we look at the information in chronological order, we shall have the following summary:
    The first part of the operation had been covert intelligence gathering and raids using a unique gay honeytrap contact magazine advertising unlawful and extreme activities from 1983 as a preliminary.
    1983-86 -Raids commenced and continued until around 1986 without targeting those who would later be charged (spannermen).
    Interest was focussed solely on gay men and their activities.
    Second part 1987-90:
    After a break of many months, in spring 1987 all 16 defendants were raided and later charged. Most of what followed is well documented.
    The three year investigation had been 1983 to 1986, and not as officially stated.
    The Spannermen appear to have been singled out from 1983 onwards, and were the last to be raided and charged in spring 1987.
    In view of what we now know, and considering that it would appear (at face value) that there had been a massive amount of suicides from the first part of the operation only, involving over 624 raids, but no defendants were forthcoming, until the second part.
    The whole matter,in my opinion, should be fully investigated from start to finish.

  19. grimstock says:

    In summary, it does not appear to have been the defendants who carried out the most obscene acts of Operation Spanner.

  20. Poster for meeting with Hames and MAry Whitehouse 1991 https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C-Qb0pOXgAMWkSL.jpg HT @thewakeupcall09

  21. Just about readable copy of Gay Times August 1992 “Police Chiefs come under fire for supporting Mary Whitehouse” https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C-QqZGiWAAIc9v_.jpg:large or https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C-QqZGiWAAIc9v_.jpg HT @thewakeupcall09

  22. Operation Spanner Demo Leaflet 1993

    HT @thewakeupcall09

  23. grimstock says:

    “Alan Oversby, 56, a tattooist, of Bayswater, London, faces 14 charges
    of malicious wounding, causing bodily harm to two men and an unnamed
    woman, grievous bodily harm with intent, having an obscene photograph
    and administering illegal drugs.”

    Tributes to Alan Oversby (aka Mr. Sebastian) who was charged with offences related to tattoos, body piercing, and body modifications, (a photograph of such), including administration of local anaesthetic.
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/obituaries/obituary-mr-sebastian-1348608.html
    https://wiki.bme.com/index.php?title=Mr._Sebastian
    http://www.tattoomuseum.co.uk/page44.htm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s